Conversation in either English or Latin was a little difficult at times because an exuberant birthday party was going on at the same time, occasioning a misquote from the Cambridge Latin Course – Quam raucae sunt vōcēs puellārum!

Pat had selected six passages from the Vulgate for us to read (see below), of which we actually got through four: the curing of Hezekiah (II Kings: 17), the reign of King Amon (II Kings 20: 19-24), Tobit’s advice to his son (Tobias 4: 1-12) and Psalm 1. We noted again that St. Jerome’s original 4th century Vulgate, which we were using in th Clementine (16th century) edition and which was for many centuries the only one authorized by the Catholic Church, is now supplemented by the Nova Vulgata formally release by the Vatican in 1979 . This is available on-line at http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/nova_vulgata/documents/nova-vulgata_index_lt.html

Eugene reported two places in which the new Vulgate’s text of the Hezechiah passage differed from the older one, viz in 20:1 (Dispōne domuī tuae for Praecipe domuī tuae) and 20: 5 (sānō tē for sānāvī tē). Taking the words at their most literal, the first change is from simply from `Give instructions to your household’ to `Make arrangements for your household’, both amounting to `Put your affairs in order.’ The second alteration is from the perfect tense (`I have cured’) to present (`I cure/am curing’). As Hezechiah’s cure is not actually complete untl the poultice of figs is placed on his sore later in the passage, the Nova Vulgata version arguably fits the context better, as does the future tense used in the King James Version. However, the original Hebrew rōpē (רֹ֣פֶא) is perfect tense so Jerome’s sānāvit actually seems the better choice! Biblical Hebrew has a two-tense system – perfect and imperfect. The former corresponds roughly to the Latin perfect (i.e. to both present perfect and simple past in English) whilst the latter refers normally to the future or to habitual action in the present. Presumably the Biblical author used the perfect to suggest that the action was an accomplished fact as soon as God announced his intention.

Whilst going through the same passage we discussed the pronunciation of parietem, wall, Dictionaries all show the `e’ in the penultimate syllable as short so the stress must fall on the second syllable: pa–RI-e-tem. A subsequent Internet serch revealed that in one line of Plautus (Asinaria, l.564) the i is pronouncedas a consonant, thus making the first syllable `long by position’ and also the bearer of the stress: PAR-je-tēs (accusative plural).

We looked at an impression made from Hezechiah’s own seal, which bears an inscription in old Hebrew characters meaning `the property of king Hezechiah’ and was discovered during excavations at the Temple Mound in 2015 (see https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/12/jerusalem-king-hezekiah/418431/ ). Hezechiah, who probably reigned from c.729 to 687 B.C. and thus lived through the 722 destruction of the Northern Kingdom of Israel by Assyria, is credited by the author of Kings with suppressing the worship of `idols’ and centralising the cult of Yahweh in the temple at Jerusalem. The winged sun is arguably consistent with this as Yahweh may have been in origin a sun god but the inclusion of the Egyptian ankh sybol for `life’ (the cross with a loop) perhaps suggests that the Jews at this time were more open to diverse religious influences. Many scholars believe that monotheism in the true sense developed only after the Babylonian exile in the 6th century.

​We were unsure of the correct pronunciation of the name `Isaiah’, which John thought ought to be three syllables with `ai’ pronounced as a diphthong, with or without a `y’ glide into the final syllable but Eugene believed should be four syllables with both the first `a’ and the `i’ as separate vowels. Eugene’s later research suggests that both views are right. On page 810 (of the PDF, not the book itself) of the 1913 edition of Joseph Perin’s Onomasticon Totius Latinitatis (http://librinostri.catholica.cz/download/5_Perin-A-I-text.pdf ) it is stated that Īsaiās is trisyllabic and that both the last and the middle syllables are long, which, as the printed text does not have a macron over the first `a’, presumably means that `ai’is indeed a diphthong and the pronunciation is thus /ī 'sai ās/. In the liturgy, however, and particularly in Gregorian chant, the word was indeed pronounced as four separate syllables with the stress on the `i’, viz. /i sa 'i as/The sung version can be heard at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETYDs2Xb5cQ&t=188s and the general rule is that in the liturgy only ae, oe, au, ay et eu are diphthongs, both `ai’ and `ou’ thus being two separate vowels (see https://media.musicasacra.com/pdf/liberusualis.pdf - p. 37 (of the PDF, not the book itself)).

The Book of Tobias, which survives in two Greek versions, the original Hebrew or Aramaic having been lost, was probably composed in the period between 225 and 175 B.C. and is accepted as copnanical by the Catholic and Orthodox churches but not by Protestants. Pat thought that it reflected Zoroastrian influence and this comment led to discussion of Zoroastrianism itself, which has, controversially, sometimes been seen as the main source of many Judaiac doctrines including the development of monotheism itself (see the discussion in the record of the June 2017 meeting - https://linguae.weebly.com/conventus-iunius.html Pat, who is a friend of Hong Kong’s Zoroastrian priest, explained the dualistic nature of the religion with the embodiment of darkness, Angra Mainyu, existing independently of the supreme God Ahura-Mazda, the embodiment of light. Individual human beings, by their day-to-day moral decisions, contribute to the outcome of the final struggle between the two. Zoroastrianism emphasizes the obligation on humans to make use of Ahura-Mazda’s gifts, including friendship and sex, and permits the use of alcohol though not, of course, drunkenness. The religion traditionally has not accepted conversion, insisting that members can only be the offspring of two Zorroastrian parents, though some revisionists have started to question this doctrine.

We discussed the reference the words nōn resurgent impiī in judiciō (`the wicked will not rise/stand in judgement’), meaning presumably that the jusgement will go against them. Pat saw a paralle to the use of resurgō here in the practice in traditional Chinese courts. The defendant was requitred to kneeling or lyin on the floor during proceedings and could only get up if found innocent. If he was convicted he was presumably dragged off to execution or to prison.

Although we did not actually reads the passage from Acts out loud, we discussed it briefly, Pat suggesting that the style of the opening section (Dēscendit prīnceps sacerdōtum, Ananīas, cum seniōribus quibusdam, et Tertullō quōdam oratore…) was out of keeping with the rest of the book and that it might have been taken directly form the official record of proceedings in Felix’s court. John thought this unlikely as the narrative was originally written in Greek. We also discussed briefly the date of Acts, which it was suggested was composed in the 60s or 70s B.C. However, if the Wikipadia article is o be trusted, most scholars would date it rather later – 80-90 B.C. or perhaps even to the 2nd. century – see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_the_Apostles.

Mention was also made of the earliest manuscript of any section of the New Testament, a fragment of the Gospel of John dated somewhere between 125 and 200 A.D. and now in the John Rylands Library in Manchester: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rylands_Library_Papyrus_P52The fragment itself, with transliterations and translation are shown below:

a King I am. For this I have been born and (for this) I have come into the world so that I would test- ify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears of me my voice." Said to him Pilate, "What is truth?" and this having said, again he went out unto the Jews and said to them, "I find not one fault in him."

​There was a brief discussion of the use of Latin as an international language, particularly in academia, in early modern times, including the fact that Newton’s Principia Mathematica was published first in that language (in 1687) and only afterwards in English. Mention was also made of the 17th century political philosopher, Thomas Hobbes, whose Leviathan, a defence of royal authority as a bulwark against anarchy, we thought must also have been published in Latin. Later investigation reveals that the first edition came out in English in 1651 but the second, which differed in some passages in content, came out in Latin in 1668. A recent edition of his work includes parallel English and Latin texts and translations of the Latin where it differs in meaning: see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leviathan_(book) andhttps://global.oup.com/academic/product/thomas-hobbes-leviathan-9780198723967?lang=en&cc=au# The principal reason for Hobbes’ change of language was presumably that the book could only be published on the European mainland after he had been denounced for atheism in England. However, even if he had not had this problem, the work would presumably still have been translated into Latin so that those outside Britain could read it. Newton’s Optica and the work of another political translation, had similarly been first issued in English but then made available in the international language. Newton could certainly think in Latin, as this is the language of his notes preserved in Cambridge University Library whilst Hobbes was an accomplished translator of both Latin and Greek texts. Although Locke didnot make his own Latin translation, he corresponded in the language with foreign scholars and was also able to vet the translator’s work.

We briefly disssed the intrusive nature of email and the way it has virtually changed everywhere into an office. It was noted that France had recently introduced legislation barring employers from requiring their employees to deal with correspondence out of work hours.

There was also mention of the large number of Koreans now working in Hong Kong, the reason possibly being current poor employment prospects in Korea itself,

Finally, a new member, Keith Kampen, who is teaching with Anastasia at the ISF Academy, explained the nature of the classics programmes there. In addition to the well-established Latin lessons, there are now 11 students doing ancient Greek as an extra-curricular activity and students in the primary section were introduced to Greek mythology in translation.

NOTES[1]præcipe domuī tuæ, Here = “Put your affairs in order”, or “Take care for your household”.[2]pariēs -ietis = “An internal wall”[3]antequam ēgrederētur…mediam partem ātriī: `before Isaiah left the middle part of the courtyard.’ However, the Hebrew (followed by the KJV) actually means `before he went out into the middle court’. The Greek Septuagint gives the sense `whilst he was in the middle court’ and a variant reading in the Hebrew would mean `before he went out into the middle of the city’ (i.e. the depression between the twin hills on which Jerusalem was built.) See http://biblehub.com/commentaries/2_kings/20-4.htm[4]massa fīicōrum = “A poultice of figs”[5]ulcus, ulceris = “An ulcer”[6]immunditiæ, immunditiis = “Unclean things”; meaning here “foreign gods”[7]dērelīquit = “Abandoned”[8]tetendēruntque eī īnsidiās: “they stretched out (laid) an ambush for him” (metaphor from netting an animal).[9]quī conjūrāverant = “Those who had sworn together”

NOTES[1] The Book of Tobias (or Tobit) is regarded as canonical by the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches but not by Protestants or Jews. No complete Hebrew or Aramaic text has survived but fragments in both language discovered in 1952 amongst the Dead Sea Scrolls indicate the original composition must have been in or before the 2nd. Century B.C. St Jerome tells us that he made his Latin translation from an Aramaic version. There are two different Greek versions preserved in different manuscripts of the Septuagint. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Tobit and (for the Greek texts) http://www.sacred-texts.com/bib/poly/tob004.htm[2]in corde tuō quasi fundāmentum cōnstrue = “Make of [them] as it were a foundation in your heart”[3] sepelī = “Bury”[4]memor enim esse dēbēs quæ et quanta pericula passa sit propter tē in uterō suō = “You ought to bear in mind those dangers, and how many, she suffered in her womb for you”[5]prætermittās præcepta = “Break the precepts”[6]fac eleēmosynam = “Give alms”[7]sī exiguum tibi fuerit, etiam exiguum libenter impertīrī studē = “If you have little, do not fear to give gladly even from that little”[8]præmium enim bonum tibi thēsaurizās in die necessitātī = “It will be for you a good thing stored away [thēsaurizās = you place in the treasury] against the day when you need it”[9]nōn patiētur animam īre in tenebrās = “And will not allow your soul to go into the darkness”[10]fīdūcia magna = “Great trust” “great savings”

NOTES[1]abiit in cōnsiliō = “Take council with” “take advice from”[2]cathedra = “Chair, throne”[3]dēcursūs aquarum = “Running water”; dēcursus originally meant `running down’ but also came to mean a channel (e.g. an aqueduct) through which water descends[4] Notice the short medial vowel; dō, dare, dedī ,datum was originally a fully irregular verb but was later absorbed into the first conjugation whilst still normally retaining short `a’[5] dēfluet = “will wither” (literally `will flow down’)[6]pulvis = “Dust” The Hebrew is more accurately translated as `chaff’ (i.e. the husks etc. separated from the corn in winnowing).[7]resurgent = here “will be found innocent” (literally `will not rise (again)’). The reference might be to judgement at any time or to God’s Last Judgement,

NOTES[1]cingulum lumbōrum: perhaps in context best translated “Belt around his waist”(lumbī means both `loins’ and `genitals’; the Hebrew (mothen) originally meant `waist’ or `small of the back’ )[2]cinctōrium rēnum = “Ties around his loins”(rēnēs = kidneys, loins); KJV has `reins’, in the archaic English sense of `kidneys’, `lower part of the back.’[1]virga = “shoot”, “twig”, “rod”[2]radix – radīcis f = “root”[3]arguet in æquitāte pro mānsuētīs terræ = “He will give fair sentences for the meek ones in the land”. The original Hebrew means `poor, lowly’, mānsuētus normally means `tame, mild, gentle’[4]spīritō labiōrum suorum = “By the breath of his lips”[5]cingulum lumbōrum: perhaps in context best translated “Belt around his waist”(lumbī means both `loins’ and `genitals’; the Hebrew (mothen) originally meant `waist’ or `small of the back’ )[6]cinctōrium rēnum = “Ties around his loins”(rēnēs = kidneys, loins); KJV has `reins’, in the archaic English sense of `kidneys’, `lower part of the back.’

Paul is arraigned by Tertullus before the Governor. After flattering Felix, governor of Judaea, for his good government, Tertullus states that Paul is a pest, stirring up trouble everywhere. The Governor’s assistant, Lysias, forbade the Jews to deal with Paul themselves, and ordered them to appear before the Governor: the Governor can easily find the facts out. (Acts 24:1-9)

NOTES[1]ōrātōre: usually means `orator’, `public speaker’, but in this context probably = “Prosecutor”[2]adiērunt præsidem adversus Paulum = “They came before the Governor against Paul”[3]cītātō Paulō: ablative absolute (`with Paul summoned’, `Paul having been summoned’)[4] suscipimus: the basic meaning of the verb suscipiō (= sub + capiō) is `take hold of from underneath’. In context, it can be the equivalent of, inter alia, `undertake’, `support;, `accept’ or `acknowledge’[5] Marcus Antonius (or Claudius?) Felix was procurator of Judaea in 53-58 B.C. and in fact generally reckoned to have been a corrupt administrator. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonius_Felix[6]violāre cōnātus est = “Attempted to violate”[7] i.e a tribūnus mīlitum, a young man at the start of his public career who acted as one of the deputies to the commander (lēgātus) of a Roman legion.[8]adjēcērunt (=adiēcērunt): `added (sc. their words)’[9]haec ita sē habēre: `that this was the case’ (literally `that these things had themselves thus.’ This is a very common idiom. Compare Bene vōs habētis?, `Are you well’ (literally `Do you have yourselves well’).

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.